Election Notes: Some Renewable Energy Tidbits You May Have Overlooked

President Obama won the re-election. This has been the big global headline for the past two days, and it has allowed the renewable energy industry to let out a huge sigh of relief. There’s hope.

But after skimming through the numerous Obama headlines, I came across a few election stories that haven’t made the front page.

While Obama’s win has been seen as a big win for renewables, Michigan voters put a damper on accelerated progress. Proposal 3 called for the state to generate 25 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020, and utilities would not have been able to raise electricity rates by more than one percent. Voters turned the proposal down by a margin of almost two-to-one, according to Bloomberg.

“The overwhelming rejection of Proposal 3 is an endorsement that the state’s existing energy policy is working,” said Howard Edelson, campaign manager for Clean Affordable Renewable Energy for Michigan Coalition. “Voters clearly recognized that the state’s constitution is not the place for costly energy policy.”

Michigan’s current law, set in 2008, requires 10 percent renewables by 2015. The proposal caused quite a stir throughout the election season; opponents spent more than $35 million in a campaign to block the initiative, which outspent supporters three times over.

Voters in Arizona had a similar reaction to an increased renewable standard threat. The “Solar Team,” which was comprised of three Democrats vying for control of the Arizona Corporation Commission that regulates public utilities, lost their chance to increase the State’s renewables mandate. Voters instead chose three Republicans to dominate the commission, each of whom, though not against solar, are not keen on pushing the current mandate too high, according to Phoenix New Times. Arizona’s current mandate calls for its utilities to generate 15 percent of its energy from renewables by 2025.

But while Arizona and Michigan voters seemed skittish to accept more renewable energy, a new poll found that most U.S. voters strongly support renewable energy and advocate increasing its use. The poll, conducted on more than 1,000 voters in 11 swing states Nov. 4 to Nov. 6 by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, found that more than 70 percent favored an increase in wind and solar energy, and attacks on Obama’s dealings with Solyndra, the Keystone pipeline, and being “anti-coal” had little to no effect on votes.

While the election results had an expected negative affect on the stock market as a whole, and it dropped nearly 300 points on the day after the election, renewable energy stocks seemed to have sustained minimal impact. According to CBS, some of the few stocks that benefitted from Obama’s re-election were renewable energy companies – especially solar manufacturers (Yingli and First Solar each rose 2 percent), and those in the coal business were heavily impacted with some companies taking up to a 10 percent loss.

With both good and bad news stemming from the election, the renewable energy industry seems to be banking on Obama’s victory as a sign of hope for the future. As always, his victory speech provides much needed optimism for the future of the clean energy industry:

"We want our children to live in an America that isn't burdened by debt, that isn't weakened by inequality, that isn't threatened by the disruptive power of a warming planet,” said Obama. “We want to pass on a country that's safe and respected and admired around the world."

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com
or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for
accuracy, spelling or grammar.

10 Comments

Yes a lot of folks, here in Michigan, didn't like the "amending the constitution idea" for renewable or other initiatives. Though historically this is how voter initiatives work here in Michigan and the State Constitution has been frequently amended by voters. This year the conservative super pacs created a successful campaign about keeping our "hands off the Constitution". Evidently it is okay for amendments against same-sex marriage but not for "progressive ideals". The other major stumbling block was the inclusion of biomass in the proposal. Biomass always causes a lot of controversy since there are a lot of incineration technologies out there that have now cloaked themselves as biomass and can be terrible polluters. A lot of environmentalists were worried these would be the types of projects that would be pushed even though most of them don't provide enough energy to make a lot of sense for trying to reach the 25 x 25 objective. This vote however, did not reflect the fact that voters think the "the state's existing energy policy is working". It's not. The fact that in order to meet those standards utilities can get their renewables from other states like Ohio, has created a lack of demand for renewable projects within the State where there is no existing SREC program to encourage growth. A lot of companies in the renewable industry have or having been exploring the idea of leaving the state to look for greener pastures elsewhere. The defeat of 25X25 will likely speed this process up.

' it has allowed the renewable energy industry to let out a huge sigh of relief.' That the subsidies will continue. But money bills originate in the House. And it is still Republican. All this article says if you read between the lines is that AE does not at this point make economic sense in terms of a nationwide roll out.

From Allister Pearce Bestobell. BestSolar Malawi....yes certainly an excellent article but the industry cannot place its future success on the shoulders of one man although his political will is there.we wish your good reelected President Obama every success in leading America back onto the financial road of success.
RE in Malawi is our ONLY source of energy through hydro. there is much room to add to this.
our daylight hours provide huge energy absorption possibilities for PV and water heating.
Malawi is not a wind swept country at all however there are many pla
ces along the Rift valley mountains forming the escarpment from the low velt of Mozambique 1000ft below where wind will fill your shirt all day every day and night. much energy can be dirived from this especially when the latest piezzo electric generators come into fruision to revolutionise the way we develope electricity today. hopefully America spends its investment resources developing this amazing future product.
Malawi ...one of the few countries totally relying on renewable energy in the world unfortunately charges duty on equipment import instead of promoting its use. so short of power are we that we have load shedding for 4 to 8 hours per day.
Malawi like Mauritius could legislate only sun energy be used for water heating.no importation of 3kw electric water heat geysers.
the use of NOT low energy lightbulbs and ban incandescent bulb import but rather that of LED light bulbs saving 95% of the night time energy light load.
Discontinue import tax on RE equipment to releive the outlying people of the base cost of PV.
there is so much that can be done in this wonderful but impoverished country to alleviate the energy needs without spending much needed financial resource on other sources of energy.
the articles on this RE news source are always interesting.

ANONYMOUS
November 9, 2012

Myself and many people I know here in Michigan are very pro raising the alternative energy/total energy percentage but felt that putting such a provision in the constitution was not the way to go. We elect representatives to do such business and saw this as a constitutional intrusion and having the proposition go down was absolutely not an indigntment against alterantive or renewable energy. I feel certain we will raise the percentage in the future but via non-constitutional means. All other constitutional incursions were also defeated here, so I wouldn't read this in any other way than an informed electorate not wanting to tamper with a core document that, like our federal constitution is a framework and not a laundry list of passed bills. By the way, I didn't appreciate the negative bias against renewables that the propostion's opponents put forth. I don't think this would have passed even if the oppostion didn't spend a penny.

ANONYMOUS
November 9, 2012

In an even more ominous turn against the wind industry there is this:

PASSADUMKEAG WIND PROJECT DENIED BY THE DEP ON CUMULATIVE ADVERSE SCENIC IMPACT : A FIRST IN MAINE
Posted by monique aniel on November 9, 2012 at 10:30am
View Blog

IN THE SUMMER OF 2009 , STEVE THURSTON AND I MET WITH JAMES CASSEDA AND ANDREW FISKE, THEN DEP DECISION MAKERS FOR WIND PROJECTS , EXPOSING THE DEVASTATING SCENIC EFFECTS THE 22 RECORD HILL TURBINES WOULD HAVE ON THE SCENERY OF THE WESTERN MOUNTAINS .

CASSEDA TOLD US THAT LD 2283 PREVENTED THEM FOR USING THAT ARGUMENT AS RECORD HILL DID NOT FIT IN ANY EXCEPTION MADE FOR AREAS OF STATE OR NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE AS PER THE EXPEDITED WIND LAW.

WE TOLD HIM THAT WHEN OTHER PROJECTS WOULD COME ... THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF THOSE TURBINES WOULD BE DEVASTATING ON THE VIEWSHED OF THE WESTERN MOUNTAINS.

HE RESPONDED THAT THE DEP MUST EXAMINE PROJECT CASE BY CASE BUT THAT INDEED THIS MAY BECOME AN ANGLE TO CONSIDER WHEN SEVERAL PROJECTS ARE OPERATING IN A SIMILAR VIEWSHED .

IN MARCH 2012, AFTER A YEAR OF EFFORTS CONSECUTIVE TO THE 2011 LEGISLATIVE, WIND WARRIORS LOBBYISM AIMED AT AMENDING LD2283, THE FINAL OEIS REPORT CALLED " MAINE WIND ASSESSMENT 2012" WAS PRODUCED AND AMONGST ITS MANY OBSERVATIONS, THE PROBLEMS WITH CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF MULTIPLE PROJECTS WERE FINALLY BROUGHT TO LIGHT : PLEASE READ A SMALL EXCERPT OF THE OEIS REPORT ON THAT TOPIC :

"2. Cumulative Visual Impact

The potential cumulative visual impacts from multiple wind farms is an issue which has become a focus of attention and research within the past year. LURC and DEP understand cumulative visual impact as resulting from either of two circumstances: a concentration of turbines that dominate a particular landscape; or the dispersal of turbines throughout a landscape over a considerable distance"

PERU — An ordinance regulating wind-energy developments was approved by the town on Tuesday by a vote of 585-30.

Jim Pulsifer, chairman of the Industrial Wind Power Committee that drafted the regulations, said they "wrote a very strong ordinance that would make it very hard to bring wind turbines here."
He said the next step is up to developers.

EDP Renewables North America LLC, of Houston, Texas, announced it was considering building 25 to 35 turbines in Peru. The company received a permit in October 2011 to place a meteorological test tower off Black Mountain Road near the Sumner town line.

Another DIRIGO moment in the fast decline of public support for 'big' wind.

'...the renewable energy industry seems to be banking on Obama's victory as a sign of hope for the future.'

I hope this isn't true. Why are people looking to one person to solve the RE needs. It is up to the people to decide what is best, so educating them, and banking on their decisions would seem a much better approach. It would probably prove to be a lot cheaper and more effective than trying to bribe congress.

So long as we don't repeat the corporate focused Wind & PV-centric mistake of the Stimulus. Shoveling tax money at problems may appeal to the Beltway crowd, but taxpayers disagree. Especially when even the media acknowledges that most of it ends up in the pockets of campaign contributors. We've had enough of that long enough.

Daylighting and solar thermal are already cost effective, and that is why Futura Solar has focused on them, as have so many other small businesses.

Add Your Comments

As associate editor of RenewableEnergyWorld.com, I coordinate and edit feature stories, contributed articles, news stories, opinion pieces and blogs. I also research and write content for RenewableEnergyWorld.com and REW magazine. I manage...